‘By undermining science’s claim of objectivity, these postmodernists have unwittingly laid the philosophical foundation for the new rise of authoritarianism.’
In making this indescribably anti-intellectual statement to oppose anti-intellectualism, Shawn Otto has tapped into everything that makes political rhetoric dishonest. In doing so where he did it, he suborned a de facto endorsement of Clinton by the Scientific American this month, and through that gambit, the apparent endorsement of American scientists as a whole.
What were the editors thinking? That Otto is a science rock star, is what. That science needs to be rescued from the forces of darkness that congregate in the grotesque confederation of Republican creatures whose sole mission it is to make people’s lives a misery … and to destroy the republic. Is what! That mercenary opportunists, reared on rôle models succeeding through crimes of greed, are bending old left ideas to new ‘me-all-the-time-now’ causes, is what. But mostly that science in the USA is pretty fucked if another Republican Neanderthal occupies the White House at the same time that his tribe controls Congress. Is what.
I can’t help but agree with the conclusion, even if I think the reasoning hits every branch of the irrationality tree on the suicidal dive from the very top to the very bottom. That our luckless protagonist survives this fall with broken bones and bruises is little consolation, even if the alternative is a broken neck.
Fuck you, Otto, for painting me into a corner here.
I’ll tell you right now that I couldn’t have devised a rhetoric substantially different to yours had I been in your shoes. But I’m not in your shoes, and from my geolocation, where my real, not theoretical, galoshes connect to the ground, you are a coward, and every bit as much a part of the problem in American politics as all the people you complain about in your breathlessly glib denunciation of what must be half your compatriots.
What’s wrong with your argument is its relentless pursuit of stereotypes that explain nothing about the real threats to science. That explain nothing at all about the slow death of American democracy. And that explain even less, if that’s possible, under some interdimensional cognitive dissonance warp theory of quantum mechanics, about your nominal ‘enemies’.
You pander shamelessly to a supposed culture of ignorance as much as any Republican. And in doing so you don’t acknowledge that the root causes for all you complain of is an atrophied education system, a signally unsecular state that has legally reduced all women, and all men who are not white, to the status of criminals, terrorists, whores, or slightly more exalted property. In doing what you do, you refuse to accept any responsibility for the cowardice inherent in allowing big property crimes to go unpunished, while little ones have led to the creation of massively profitable and overtly racist gulags.
You absolve yourself of addressing these issues because it isn’t ‘science’. So, in condemning identity politics, you preach it for scientists as a category exempt from developing human decency, and from engaging with the social formation in which they operate.
Just what kind of fucking monster are you?
Your propaganda message begins by displacing all normative political terminology along the same lines as the plutocratic media that hates you. Lucky politics isn’t a science, eh? Otherwise you would be considered a charlatan. Along with Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, which really fucking hates you.
Every self-respecting conservative would want to do you physical harm for conflating conservatism with the leaky umbrella of Republicanism which taints with dirty water all the crypto-fascists, crypto reactionaries, and outright lunatics who huddle under its chimerical cover.
If you’re looking for an authentic conservative stereotype, look no further than Barack Obama.
Then you ascribe to liberalism a quality it has never possessed, which is radicalism. Even if you admit to the American exceptionalism that allows only for realities that can be owned exclusively by Americans, since 1980 radicalism has been the sole domain of every fungus growing in the perpetual benightedness of theocratic and ideological Republican recidivism.
Your nominally left mercenaries waging a war of identity politics aren’t of the left. They belong with the Republican mediaevalists in any serious analysis of what it is they say and do.
You talk about the ‘left’ as if it existed after its genocidal extermination by McCarthyism in the 1950s. But you waste no breath at all on the plutocratic mercenaries who play at nihilistic games for short-term gains even they can’t sustain in a Chinese century. The very same plutocrats who fund the Republican Fourth Reich at the same time as the phoney Weimar Clinton ‘alternative’.
Either you are as ignorant as one of the clumps of sod you used to build your house, or you are asserting that your audience is. And your audience is nominally composed of scientists, so you are proposing that scientists are dumb fucks in the same breath as arguing their exemption from reality. If only they vote Clinton. Because science. And the fact that Clinton appreciates the science behind police state surveillance toys, drone vehicles, and Hellfire missiles.
I ask again: what kind of a monster are you?
Let’s get just a little bit real for a while.
If you don’t have the guts to oppose religionism, you’re a fellow traveller. Like Obama. Like Clinton. A supporter of an entitled ‘right’ for the most ignorant, bigoted people on the planet to remove the defining feature of liberal democracy: the secular state. A right for these people to reduce millions of fellow citizens to a lesser status on the basis of bigotry.
But you want the new lower castes to support exemptions from that status for scientists? Get real, boychick.
No mention in your propaganda message, either, of the pressing need for science people to become more fully human by learning some humanities. If not for the selfish motive of creating exploitable contexts for their actions, then maybe to actually become fully functioning adults with an understanding of politics and a conscience about their effects on it beyond the queues they are in for a nosebag.
That ugly word: politics. Which has never been, and never will be about science, or your masturbation fantasy about objective truth. Or any other kind of fixed position.
Where’s the admonishment to scientists about sociopathic ignorance about the societies they live in and help to shape while cashing pay cheques from big pharma, big poisonous chemicals, big fucking guns, and big useless silicon toys? Where’s the acknowledgment that science is as full of entitled sexist scum as any Trump rally, and twice as likely to cover up the fact?
If I was a little boy, like you, with no moral conscience or experience of adversity in which that might become crucial, I would still cry big crocodile tears for the tragedy of your ignorance, and the inevitability that people will conclude your pathetic debasement of human knowledge is adequate grounds for voting Clinton.
The soul-destroying reality is that any sane person in the USA must. The Republican field offers only irredeemable psychopaths. The opportunity to choose something better was destroyed by a baleful and barely concealed criminal campaign authorised by the next president of the USA.
She, at least, might temper her sociopathic instincts to maintain a chance at a second term with the support of the people she has lied, is lying to, and will lie to. Her focus has nothing to do with science, boychick. And everything to do with power for its own sake.
Talk to me sometime in 2020. If you survive your new brutopia that long, boychick.